It’s great to be Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). For Peter Parker, there’s no feeling quite like swinging between skyscrapers, embracing being the hero, and spending time with Gwen (Emma Stone). But being Spider-Man comes at a price: only Spider-Man can protect his fellow New Yorkers from the formidable villains that threaten the city. With the emergence of Electro (Jamie Foxx), Peter must confront a foe far more powerful than he. And as his old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, Peter comes to realize that all of his enemies have one thing in common: Oscorp.

Groups

It wasn't a great film (especially compared to the Homecoming reboot with the character brought into the fold of the MCU (finally!) - but you know what.... for £3.89 it's worth it, I mean it's 2 hours of entertainment (the 3D version no less) with bonus features for less price than a fancy sandwich, and (after all) it's Spidey!, who doesn't love a bit of Spidey?.

Heat added.

*Thwip

Edited by: "SimyJo" 15th Jul 2017

15th Jul 2017

You might also find this in the odd poundland. I got the 3d version about the weeks ago. If not, its a pretty good price for a watchable movie

15th Jul 2017

for me, it's the closest they came to doing spiderman right - the character at least.

homecoming has eclipsed this in that respect. I might have a re-watch of this one later though

Worst movie I've ever paid to see is transformers the last knight. £14 for something that seemed like an amateur film maker shot it due to the constantly charging screen size. The always blurry 3d despite supposedly being filmed in IMAX 3d. And possibly the worst story and and characters in the whole franchise. Yet this was the movie id been looking forward to the most in all my life when I first heard about it. I feel really decepticon...sorry deceived.

15th Jul 2017

IronGlaive

Worst movie I've ever paid to see is transformers the last knight. £14 … Worst movie I've ever paid to see is transformers the last knight. £14 for something that seemed like an amateur film maker shot it due to the constantly charging screen size. The always blurry 3d despite supposedly being filmed in IMAX 3d. And possibly the worst story and and characters in the whole franchise. Yet this was the movie id been looking forward to the most in all my life when I first heard about it. I feel really decepticon...sorry deceived.

Worst movie I've ever paid to see is transformers the last knight. £14 for …Worst movie I've ever paid to see is transformers the last knight. £14 for something that seemed like an amateur film maker shot it due to the constantly charging screen size. The always blurry 3d despite supposedly being filmed in IMAX 3d. And possibly the worst story and and characters in the whole franchise. Yet this was the movie id been looking forward to the most in all my life when I first heard about it. I feel really decepticon...sorry deceived.

I've watched the Last knight twice, the first time I hated it. The first time in Aberdeen, where I think they messed up the aspect ratio. They had the letterbox screen black bars at the top and bottom, and black bars at the side. This made the changing ratios even more noticeable and distracting. The second time I watched in St Helens, this time no black bars at the side, and it made the ratio changes less noticeable. OK it didn't make the movie a good movie, just not as bad.

16th Jul 2017

sunnyhot

Possibly one of the worst movies I've seen.

I really enjoyed it. I know the reviews aren't very good so I'm obviously in the minority.

Anyone paying money to watch a Transformers sequel deserves to be ripped …Anyone paying money to watch a Transformers sequel deserves to be ripped off. Sorry

Very true, you are right!

I only went as it was supposedly the only true 3d movie to be film or produced/released in years. But the 3d was disgraceful hence why I felt most ripped off....I had to keep closing one eye to get rid of blurry images. That on top of only 60 percent of the huge screen been used (so as to account for the constant aspect ratio changes), meant my TV screen is bigger at home from the seat I booked.

I've watched the Last knight twice, the first time I hated it. The first …I've watched the Last knight twice, the first time I hated it. The first time in Aberdeen, where I think they messed up the aspect ratio. They had the letterbox screen black bars at the top and bottom, and black bars at the side. This made the changing ratios even more noticeable and distracting. The second time I watched in St Helens, this time no black bars at the side, and it made the ratio changes less noticeable. OK it didn't make the movie a good movie, just not as bad.

Very interesting. I watched it at cineworld. They had about a 2 foot black bar at the left and right of the screen throughout. The vertical image resized every new scene (about every 5 seconds or seemed). I messaged cineworld and they told me everything I noted was normal and by design from Michael bay himself.. They didn't however comment on the always blurry 3d I experienced. But the 3d trailers were amazing.... Very odd and annoying...I can understand why alot of people pirate when you can screen it better yourself so to speak.

Edited by: "IronGlaive" 16th Jul 2017

16th Jul 2017

IronGlaive

Very interesting. I watched it at cineworld. They had about a 2 foot … Very interesting. I watched it at cineworld. They had about a 2 foot black bar at the left and right of the screen throughout. The vertical image resized every new scene (about every 5 seconds or seemed). I messaged cineworld and they told me everything I noted was normal and by design from Michael bay himself.. They didn't however comment on the always blurry 3d I experienced. But the 3d trailers were amazing.... Very odd and annoying...I can understand why alot of people pirate when you can screen it better yourself so to speak.

No black bars at the side of the screen made a big difference. I've only watched in 2D, so I can't comment on the 3D blur. In 2D, I didn't notice and out of focus issues.

No black bars at the side of the screen made a big difference. I've only …No black bars at the side of the screen made a big difference. I've only watched in 2D, so I can't comment on the 3D blur. In 2D, I didn't notice and out of focus issues.

But it did make me think that there should be better laws for the cinema goer if they're not happy with the performance ( i.e. picture, sound, 3d quality), rather than the artistic/story element which is obviously subjective

Edited by: "IronGlaive" 16th Jul 2017

20th Jul 2017

IronGlaive

Very true, you are right!I only went as it was supposedly the only true … Very true, you are right!I only went as it was supposedly the only true 3d movie to be film or produced/released in years. But the 3d was disgraceful hence why I felt most ripped off....I had to keep closing one eye to get rid of blurry images. That on top of only 60 percent of the huge screen been used (so as to account for the constant aspect ratio changes), meant my TV screen is bigger at home from the seat I booked.

It was the only Summer 2017 blockbuster filmed in 3D.

3D IMAX as well, it should have been as good as it could get.

20th Jul 2017

IronGlaive

Very interesting. I watched it at cineworld. They had about a 2 foot … Very interesting. I watched it at cineworld. They had about a 2 foot black bar at the left and right of the screen throughout. The vertical image resized every new scene (about every 5 seconds or seemed). I messaged cineworld and they told me everything I noted was normal and by design from Michael bay himself.. They didn't however comment on the always blurry 3d I experienced. But the 3d trailers were amazing.... Very odd and annoying...I can understand why alot of people pirate when you can screen it better yourself so to speak.

Sounds to me like they pressed the 1.85:1 button by accident. It should not have had black bars on the sides. They are wrong.

Anyhoo... Ordered Spider-Man 2. I had the first one in 3D (from Poundland), so why not?